Cases: Discovery – Page 16 – Cal Attorneys Fees

Sixth District Demonstrates Application Of Abuse of Discretion Standard … But Also Speaks Out On Whether Opposition’s Fees Are Probative In Fee Proceedings

September 6, 2008

Court of Appeal Sustains Lower Court Determination That Opposition Fee Effort Does Not Have To Be Considered. Plaintiff and defendants settled a Home Equity Sales Contract Act case that crops up frequently in this age of subprime lender fallout cases. A settlement was reached by which the trial court was imbued […]

E-Discovery: California State And Federal Courts Will Award Attorney’s Fees As Sanctions For Hiding or Obstructing Electronic Document Discovery

July 30, 2008

Lombardo and Qualcomm Typlify Cases Sustaining Substantial Fee Awards in E-Discovery Disputes. About a year ago, LiveOffice, an on-demand messaging security provider, released these fascinating findings based on a nationwide survey: · 53% of 400 IT managers and consumers admitted that they were not in position to meet federal

Discovery Referee Orders–They Can’t Be Issued Ex Parte and Cannot Order Litigant to Pay Referee Fees/Costs in Absence of Noticed Motion

Cases: Discovery

July 1, 2008

Fourth District, Division Three Issues Mandate to Reverse Contrary Ex Parte Order. The Fourth District, Division Three, in Clayton v. Superior Court, Case No. G040482 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 27, 2008) (unpublished “by the court” decision), issued a writ of mandate overturning an ex parte order appointing a discovery referee

CAN A PARTY SEEKING AN AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES OBTAIN DISCOVERY OF ITS OPPONENT’S FEES IN ORDER TO REBUT A REASONABLENESS CHALLENGE?

Cases: Discovery

June 8, 2008

We Survey the Decisions; They Leave Plenty Room for Advocacy On Each Side of the Debate. One of the most frequent challenges to fee petitions is reasonableness—the fees being sought were too large, involved attorneys assessing unduly high hourly rates, or were riddled by excessive and duplicative charges. Although we believe it